Is open scholarship an honest signal of researcher integrity? We present preliminary evidence that data and code sharing, preprinting, and other open behaviors are indeed less common in papermill articles.
Catching up with the ongoing consolidation of the journals market — what has happened in the two years since this was last examined? And how does the market look if you add in a large number of relatively newly launched journals?
Data sonification is the process of translating data into sound. Here, Lutz Bornmann and Christian Leibel present the sonified results of a recent analysis of the impact of scientific team size on innovation.
Bibliometric databases are essential tools for research and publishing strategy. But the variability in how they parse publisher metadata and their constant evolution makes it difficult, if not impossible, to exactly reproduce any given piece of research.
Hélène Draux presents the first of a two-part effort to chart the topography of mental health scholarship. Here, established methods, including pre-existing classifications are employed.
A data scientist reviews ScopusAI (beta) and shares her analysis of its limitations, reliability, and potential.
We all know the journals market has rapidly consolidated over recent years. But where’s the data? I set out to find some numbers to put behind the common sense.
Librarian Cem Özel takes a look at the citation record for The Scholarly Kitchen.
For smaller and independent publishers, the Transformative Journal route to Plan S compliance seems like a viable option. At least until you see the reporting requirements.
Randall Munroe gives us the real scoop on what scientific papers are saying. Your suggestions welcome as well.